Here's an historic record to start with. It seems reasonable evidence against an Armageddon scenario. But how do you convince a believer. That's the real issue, I'm interested in exploring.

In the Book of Revelation, written sometime after 60AD, the following information was presented as one of the apostle John's later predictions. This particular "prediction" relates to an event that occurs during the third of three woes. To some people, these three woes have been taken to mean that the author of "revelations" was predicting or prophesying the 3rd of three world wars and an Armageddon scenario.

“14:20 They were trampled in the winepress outside the city, and blood flowed out of the press, rising as high as the horses’ bridles for a distance of 1,600 stadia.”

Yet, from another independent source from the same era, the Jewish Talmud, we have this historical event recorded.

“The struggle lasted for three years before the revolt was brutally crushed in the summer of 135 CE. After losing Jerusalem, Bar Kokhba and the remnants of his army withdrew to the fortress of Betar, which also subsequently came under siege. The Jerusalem Talmud relates that the numbers slain were enormous, that the Romans "went on killing until their horses were submerged in blood to their nostrils".[10]The Talmud also relates that for seventeen years the Romans did not allow the Jews to bury their dead in Betar”

The Bar Kokhba revolt occurred between 132-136AD. It was the third of three Jewish conflicts with Rome.

It would be plausible for Revelation to have been modified to reflect the Talmud. It could have been done by someone who expected Armageddon to occur shortly after they made the mod.

In my experience you can't convince a believer of anything. My mother was told by an astrologer that the world would end in 1998. In 2001, she still would not admit that the astrologer was wrong. As far as a believer is concerned, no prophecy can be wrong, so they must be reinterpreted to fit the unfacts. The final process is sticking their heads so far up their arse, that they turn into a singularity.

Quote

To some people, these three woes have been taken to mean that the author of "revelations" was predicting or prophesying the 3rd of three world wars and an Armageddon scenario.

"To some people", and others will mutilate it some other way. You can't catch them all out, or get them to sign any agreements in advance.

Well actually, I have a theory that can explain all prophecies as bogus. With the primary culprits as Cyrus the Great and some MAGIc, The Maccabees, Agrippa the Great, Paul the Pharisee and The twice mysteriously ( I think I know why) awarded Emperor and alleged brilliant literate Nerva friend to Nero and the Flavians.

What I am interested in is how do you take historical facts to convert the faithful to the true picture.

Oh, and just to confuse you guys some what, I have a case to argue about the existence of someone spiritually significant given the name Jesus. Game on.

A minor tangent ... a "stadium" is 190.5 meters long.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_units_of_measurementA horse's nostrils (okay short horses) are at least 1 meter off the ground. An adult human can bleed about 5 litres.Needs about 7.2 million people's blood to fill just one stadium to 1 meter depth.And then there's the mountain of bodies - somewhat more remarkable than the pool of blood!

Well actually, I have a theory that can explain all prophecies as bogus. With the primary culprits as Cyrus the Great and some MAGIc, The Maccabees, Agrippa the Great, Paul the Pharisee and The twice mysteriously ( I think I know why) awarded Emperor and alleged brilliant literate Nerva friend to Nero and the Flavians.

What I am interested in is how do you take historical facts to convert the faithful to the true picture.

Oh, and just to confuse you guys some what, I have a case to argue about the existence of someone spiritually significant given the name Jesus. Game on.

So, whom is Jesus 2.0?

Quote

Paul the Pharisee

I don't think we have a clue who Paul teh Pharisee actually is. It's agreed that 10 of his epustules are genuine, but those may have significant mods at critical points. Also, it's suspected that Acts was written by nobody who knew him, and that Acts was modified later. Also, claimed by some, that Paul may be completely invented, and exactly as ahistorical as Jesus 1.0

There is an argument that nobody can actually figure out if Paul was pro or anti Jewish law. Galatians condemns it, but Romans has a different attitude. (I lost the ref, though, and can't remember the argument.) EDIT: might be EP Sanders, but not sure.

A minor tangent ... a "stadium" is 190.5 meters long.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_units_of_measurementA horse's nostrils (okay short horses) are at least 1 meter off the ground. An adult human can bleed about 5 litres.Needs about 7.2 million people's blood to fill just one stadium to 1 meter depth.And then there's the mountain of bodies - somewhat more remarkable than the pool of blood!

That be some serious work for the gladiators. with only 86,000 seconds in a day 100 gladiators would have had to kill 72,000 people a piece to accomplish that task. That is just under 1 kill per second for 24 hours. That must get tiring. These guys would have to be pretty fit. Quite an assembly line you would have to feed in victims at a rate of 100 per second and dispose of bodies at a rate of 100 per second. Does the stadium have the capacity to push people in at a rate of 100 per second while also accomodating removal of bodies at that rate.

My theories not proven yet. I'm hoping to go to print in September. So forgive me for talking as if its fact. It saves on text.

In the Dead Sea Scrolls there is mention of a Righteous Teacher, a wicked priest and a liar. I hold that this Righteous Teacher is Jesus. I also believe that this title was handed down to his brother James the Just.

The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of the authentic Jesus sayings. These sayings emerged from the Qumran Community and this righteous teacher. Of themselves they are spiritually authentic, in my opinion. 60/114 where used by Emperor Nerva to create the Gospels that have become a foundation of the Bible. Nerva also orchestrated the works of Josephus Flavian. Further Nerva was also responsible for discovering the Corruption by the Pharisees in their attempts to recover Jews who drifted across to the teachings of this righteous teacher. This discovery was the trigger for the Great Fire incident the deaths of a significant number of key "christian bishops" . Although Rome saw them as just another Jewish Sect rather than Christians. Nerva created Roman christianity. It's also Nerva who gave us the Jesus miracle stories. You won't find Paul talking about a Jesus miracle in his letters.

The Qumran Community were Essenes (Also known as Nazareans who practiced the OT Nazarite traditions). Nerva created the Nazareth Story to hide this and other connections.

When these sayings were discovered in 1945 (at least 1700 year sold and real). Rome was quick to align the Gospel of Thomas to the "other" Gnostic traditions. If you look at it it bears no resemblance. In fact its one of the few authentically knowing pieces. The other material is related to a guy called Valentinius and has ties that go way back to the Pharisees and Cyrus the Greats original actions that started this whole affair and empires seedy use of religion for powers gain.

Valentinius has a connection to this guy called Theudas who meets his fate around 44-46AD. The same time that Agrippa I, another not so Great ruler, meets his death for being suspect of crossing Claudius the guy he helped to get Caligula's Position.

Paul/Saul/Saulus was just another Pharisee zealot with possible family connections to Agrippa the Great. He was enlisted with Mark and Barnabas to coach the Jews that drifted across to the "Jesus" teachings. They originally used an oral tradition, something that was the Pharisee form, to sway them back to a corrupted Jesus teaching that looked awfully similar to Pharisaic Judaism (Cyrus inspired). Around 51AD Claudius or Rome insisted that Paul/Sauls teachings be come written. Claudius was in on this Corruption to regain the lost Jews to Pharisaic Judaism .

As before Nero through Nerva learned about this corruption, and its this discovery that created Roman Christianity.

Anyway here's a summary if you're interested. Let me know if you find any gaps or weaknesses, only a month to publishing of the full story.

The reason no ones got close to coming up with a single theory on this stuff is they get caught in the details. Because of all the missing and corrupt information that goes with this history, the only hope we will ever have of getting to the truth is by looking for the patterns a big picture view offers.

At least that's my view. Enjoy the read :-)

And I still would like to know how you convince a believer to accept being a knower.

I have to go and look at the critique of Eisenman's theories. In his mind, the Qumran scrolls are from the early Christian sect, but everyone else says that the liar and co. are from the 1st century BCE.

In his 1994 book titled "Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls", Schiffman goes on to say:

Second, the scrolls are not the documents of an early Christian sect. Contrary to claims by certain sensationalists, the scrolls never mention Jesus, John the Baptist, or James the Just, the "brother" of Jesus. Further, the scrolls in no way reflect Christian beliefs. The only way to make such an outrageous claim is to radically redefine Christianity to accord with the scrolls. In fact, the most recent carbon-14 testing has confirmed the dating that had already been established by paleography, which is the study of the shapes of Hebrew letters and of other ancient writing. Since all the material was composed before the rise of the early church, the Dead Sea Scrolls cannot refer to those events. [page xxi]

He [Eisenman] has advocated the view that the scrolls are closely linked to early Christianity, an approach that has gained few adherents. [page 25]

A similar view has recently been espoused by some who wish to claim that the scrolls refer directly to the early Christian movement. This view, as I previously maintained, is impossible to accept on chronological grounds. [page 120]

It must be stressed at the outset that the scrolls contain no references to Christianity. Christianity is a movement that began as a Jewish sect and then developed into a separate religious group. Because the sectarian documents [i.e., Dead Sea Scrolls] were authored before the careers of John the Baptist and Jesus, the scrolls make no mention nor do they even allude to these New Testament figures -- not withstanding specious claims to the contrary. [page 371]

Are you prepared to re-date Jesus to 100 years earlier? And change his name and shit?

Quote

The reason no ones got close to coming up with a single theory on this stuff is they get caught in the details.

Yeah, reality is tricky shit. You are sounding like Archarya S. Have you considered changing your name, to avoid Christian stalkers? Where did you get the stuff about Claudius from? Did you just make it up?

The liar is either Peter or Paul/Saul/Saulus and vice versa. The pre AD theory is based on suggestions that he belongs to the Maccabee era. I don't think so. Particularly if you through in my theory about the Book of Daniel. (Note my explanation for the days references in the Book of Daniel and other things that relate that yarn to the Maccabees (Pharisees)).

No pre-dating of Jesus. However, I would entertain ideas such as Nerva using Horas as an inspiration to embellish the story. In Josephus we get a couple of mentions of a mysterious Egyptian prophet ( conveniently no name given) around the time.

I'm guessing that there are very few here interested in such things. I, for one, don't need esoteric biblical details to be explained fifty different ways to be a disbeliever. But others may enjoy it. Just don't expect fifty of us to gang up on you.

The quality of your scholarship better be darned good. It sounds like you are putting a lot of energy into it. I only hope your efforts are not a complete waste of time. That would be sad.

Logged

It isn't true that non-existent gods can't do anything. For instance, they were able to make me into an atheist.

I am with PP on this one. You may find some internet addicted theist types to get down in the weeds on this stuff with you, but I don't see this impacting folks here one way or the other. It's kind of like arguing the ingredients of baby formula with a bunch of 10 year olds. Fun for about two minutes, but they have no dog in the fight.You lost me at Daniel... that book is a mess.Good luck

I have a sense that some of you won't engage because you may be afraid that your beliefs may be threatened. Sound familiar :-) You see I don't think you guys know for sure yourselves. In that light you are no different from the religious folks. Just another "church of the believers". Of course, I could be wrong.

PP it's not the quality of the scholarship that's important. Only whether the theory holds true and consistent across the entire range of time (538BC-325AD). I think it will. Just saying.

Nothing at all to be sad about. Time will tell and as some of you know by now. I can be both patient and persistent. :-)

And neo, Nothing to do with luck and I agree that Daniel may seem a mess but its really quite simple actually. Alexander the Great brought greek traditions to the region when he conquered 10 kingdoms (you may say 10 horns, if you believed in biblical prophecies ). The Jewish people tired of the rigours of the Cyrus styled/corrupted Judaism began to drift across to the more sensible greek philosophies. The Maccabees start a campaign against the defectors. Antiochus IV(or little horn if you like that description) . This campaign was to last 2300 days . Antiochus only half of that.

When the "war" was done. The Maccabees wrote the Book of Daniel. Around 160BC . Quite a careless job too, in terms of the relationships of the Babylon rulers. A number of historical blunders there. Although the Maccabees and their sympathizers started the affair, In Daniel their God blames the Hellenized Jews for the dilemma. Further he invites them back to appease their concept of God giving tips on how that all works. This is a similar strategy that Cyrus Users in babylon. Once with Marduk, God of the Babylonians and Then with Yahweh, God of the Jewish people.

Simple, power based strategies that repeat themselves. And post Daniel their are three more corruptions to 325AD.

Easy when you take a big picture perspective. Hard when you lock into assumptions and single events.

Guys, stick to the facts. One by one. Your sounding more like believers than knowers.

What's the first fact you'd like to challenge. :-)

Well, you are getting some insights into what it would take to change a believer's mind. You are a believer in your theory, because you have put all this effort into writing a book. Therefore, you cannot change any of your views, or your book will start to fall to pieces.

This nicely explains:(1) why they are not mentioned by name(2) why carbon dating doesn't support any theories(3) why there is no historical information that jumps out at you, besides a date which puts it rather early(4) why it talks about apocalyptic shit that happened after the Teacher's death

Call me a pedant, but if it was about Christianity, it would sort of be jumping out at you. It is therefore more likely that this is a document about total crap, oblivious of Jesus, rather than something that was written to foil modern Christians. If it was written to foil modern Christians, then some facts would stand out.

No, I can change any of my views. That's the beauty of being an author. So long as I do it before it's published. :-)

Although I suggested one by one for this forum. It remains a big picture analysis. This pick up of yours AH will be highly valuable to the longer term debate. So thanks for that.

Appreciate the effort. Oh, and I'm definetly not supporting Christianity. In fact, I'm pointing out how Judaism, Christianity and maybe even Islam may all be corrupted in the name of power. I just happen to be using the Nag Hammadi's Gospel of Thomas as one means of proving that position.

One thing I'll say right of the bat on the issue relating to the Teacher of Righteousness. This history seems to be confounded by a private tussle between the Pharisees/ Jewish perspective and the Roman catholic perspective. I think this bias runs through to modern day examinations of these events. So its handy to get a persons theological position and then account for any potential bias. It's by no means an easy study, however its by no means complex if you become aware of factors like this, in my opinion.

For example, I'd suspect a Talmud scholar would lean toward an earlier date, because that fits " their" storyline and distracts from potentially revealing alternatives.

I have a sense that some of you won't engage because you may be afraid that your beliefs may be threatened. Sound familiar :-) You see I don't think you guys know for sure yourselves. In that light you are no different from the religious folks. Just another "church of the believers". Of course, I could be wrong.

What we are sure of, unfortunately, is that there are no documents that directly expose Christianity. It's not because Christianity is true or anything, but because- If there is any document, it has not been discovered yet- The documentation from this period is rather poor, and politically motivated- Christians have had a few years to ditch anything they don't like, and fix up anything they do like- Christianity may have arisen rather quickly in a historical vacuum, so no contemporary commentator had a revealing opinion on it, and if they did, Christians deleted them- It appears to be rather easy to have faked documents, and the benefit of the doubt always goes to the Christians- Any documents come without context or obvious veracity, and may have been faked in 1400 for all we know

This has lead to most arguments against Christianity being arguments from silence, logic, or critique of their official texts. This creates a rather big blind spot on Atheists, when considering unorthodox Christianities. There is actually no way we can cope with liberals, who reckon that substantial amounts have been faked, and they have some radical new interpretation, since we can't even verify the official one, and the official version is a stationary target.

(I may be wrong, because I just made all this up, without thinking about it too hard.)

Well I didn't make up my research and links are provided. Of course the challenges you mention are real. They are just not insurmountable. Time will tell.

Anyway back to your first challenge and its a good one. I hope to have a response by tomorrow.

But we can start with this from the article " There is no agreement over who they were". That alone allows room for other speculations. And if you add to that speculation my 5 Corruptions theory, you should easily see how "Jesus" was the righteous Teacher. You'll prove more of a challenge to my proposition if you read Chapter 1, me thinks.

A little more for now. This is a quote from your reference.

[God] raised for them a Teacher of Righteousness to guide them in the way of His heart. . .This is the time concerning which it has been written: “As a backsliding heifer so did Israel slide back [Hosea 4:16],” when there arose the Man of Scoffing who dropped on Israel waters of deceitfulness and caused them to wander in the wilderness where there is no path, to bring down the everlasting heights, to turn away from the ways of righteousness and to remove the boundary that the forefathers have set for their inheritance.

This was either written by a Pharisee about the Righteous Teacher labelling him as some sort of villain who had come to challenge Pharisaic Judaism as set by Cyrus the Great (the whore of Babylon). In my opinion, the Essenee were just like the Samaritans in that they blamed those returning from Babylon for stealing their religion. So this fits the theory model.

Alternatively it's about the Liar... needs more research

The author of this piece also speaks about an end of days scenario. Hark back to those horses in the blood, my claims about the Book of Isaiah and the Book of Daniel. All biblical prophesy is fraudulent, so no end of days scenarios for mine. I think I have an explanation. Will do that tomorrow.

Ben Zion Wacholder is the Solomon Freehof Professor Emeritus of Jewish Law at Hebrew Union College. The author of The Dawn of Qumran (Hebrew Union College), Wacholder played a critical role in making the Dead Sea Scrolls accessible to everyone.

I have a sense that some of you won't engage because you may be afraid that your beliefs may be threatened. Sound familiar :-) You see I don't think you guys know for sure yourselves. In that light you are no different from the religious folks. Just another "church of the believers". Of course, I could be wrong.

I'll tell you what. You christians get together and find a way to agree on what the bible says, what it means, and what it proves or otherwise demonstrates in a satisfying way, and I'll give your excuses a listen. But as long as there are tens of thousands of interpretations of that which is often called "the perfect word of god", I'm not going to get too excited about it.

My atheism is not christian specific. I have no reason to believe in any of the gods proposed over the ages. Well, if there is a god of strawberries, I really like strawberries and I might think about that one for a millisecond or two. Otherwise, nope. Of course if you can ever demonstrate that belief in your god is in any way advantageous in this life or prove beyond any doubt that the afterlife is real, I'll give your belief system a second chance. But since you can't even sort of kinda demonstrate that your god could just maybe be, sorta, real, if you tilt your head and squint, I have no interest.

Of course, you could try matchings christianity with observed reality. I know that's asking a lot, but it would go a long way in making it slightly harder for me to dismiss it. Your god, in an effort to differentiate himself from all the other gods, decided to stay invisible, just like the others. Because he's not clear on any concept. Which isn't helping. In the meantime, I shall continue to conclude that all religions, including christianity, are myths. Just like myths are myths.

In the meantime, while you're diving into scripture and trying to come up with something new and convincing, could you, while you're in there, color code the bible so that we could have some final authority on which parts are literal, which are metaphorical, which are allegory, etc. That too would really help.

Until then, you could spend a little time coming up with a really good excuse as to why the bible is so unconvincing. I've heard thousands of poor excuses, but no really good ones. But hey, a guy can hope.

In the meantime, you go ahead and do what you can to clarify the ridiculous. I appreciate your interest. There are historical things I am interested in too. Of course I tend to restrict my interests to stuff that, you know, actually happened, but hey, that's just me.

All of this is to tell you that I am very different from a believer. Not only do I lack the necessary gullibility, and lack the necessary fear of death, I also passed kindergarten on the first try so I know what fairy tales are. All of those things combine to distance me from such nonsense.

The next time you try to shove the demeaning "church of believers" label down my throat, watch out. I might start insulting you and your religion or something. You wouldn't want that.

But we can start with this from the article " There is no agreement over who they were". That alone allows room for other speculations. And if you add to that speculation my 5 Corruptions theory, you should easily see how "Jesus" was the righteous Teacher.

Why! It could be Simon of peraea, or Athronges, or Menahem Ben Judah, or even Vespasian, why are you so certain it was a person called Jesus. It's is a huge assumption to say it is a Jesus person, considering there isn't one shred of contemporaneous evidence for such a person.

Please don't try to convince me you are correct you're not making any sense whatsoever. You're jumping to far to many conclusions. To be taken seriously.

Logged

We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

Here's an historic record to start with. It seems reasonable evidence against an Armageddon scenario. But. That's the real issue, I'm interested in exploring.

No you are not. You keep posting about things "a friend said" or " how do you convince a believer [that they are wrong]" when all you are doing is repeating superstition that you yourself seem to accept.

“14:20 They were trampled in the winepress outside the city, and blood flowed out of the press, rising as high as the horses’ bridles for a distance of 1,600 stadia.”

the Romans "went on killing until their horses were submerged in blood to their nostrils".[/quote]

The phrase, "something was up to a horse's bridle" was a common hyperbole: it means there was a lot of something. Today, in the UK at least, we say,

"The footpath through the woods was like a swamp. At the end I was "up to my eyeballs in mud.""

It is idiomatic and not meant to be taken literally, but "to be up to your eyeballs in something" simply means there was a lot of it.

We also have the idiom, "It was raining cats and dogs." This does not mean that cats and dogs were coming from the sky: it simply means that it was raining heavily.

So, what you have in Revelations and the other source is simply a common phrase.

My theories not proven yet. I'm hoping to go to print in September. So forgive me for talking as if its fact. It saves on text.

In the Dead Sea Scrolls there is mention of a Righteous Teacher, a wicked priest and a liar. I hold that this Righteous Teacher is Jesus. I also believe that this title was handed down to his brother James the Just.

The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of the authentic Jesus sayings. These sayings emerged from the Qumran Community and this righteous teacher. Of themselves they are spiritually authentic, in my opinion. 60/114 where used by Emperor Nerva to create the Gospels that have become a foundation of the Bible. Nerva also orchestrated the works of Josephus Flavian. Further Nerva was also responsible for discovering the Corruption by the Pharisees in their attempts to recover Jews who drifted across to the teachings of this righteous teacher. This discovery was the trigger for the Great Fire incident the deaths of a significant number of key "christian bishops" . Although Rome saw them as just another Jewish Sect rather than Christians. Nerva created Roman christianity. It's also Nerva who gave us the Jesus miracle stories. You won't find Paul talking about a Jesus miracle in his letters.

The Qumran Community were Essenes (Also known as Nazareans who practiced the OT Nazarite traditions). Nerva created the Nazareth Story to hide this and other connections.

When these sayings were discovered in 1945 (at least 1700 year sold and real). Rome was quick to align the Gospel of Thomas to the "other" Gnostic traditions. If you look at it it bears no resemblance. In fact its one of the few authentically knowing pieces. The other material is related to a guy called Valentinius and has ties that go way back to the Pharisees and Cyrus the Greats original actions that started this whole affair and empires seedy use of religion for powers gain.

Valentinius has a connection to this guy called Theudas who meets his fate around 44-46AD. The same time that Agrippa I, another not so Great ruler, meets his death for being suspect of crossing Claudius the guy he helped to get Caligula's Position.

Paul/Saul/Saulus was just another Pharisee zealot with possible family connections to Agrippa the Great. He was enlisted with Mark and Barnabas to coach the Jews that drifted across to the "Jesus" teachings. They originally used an oral tradition, something that was the Pharisee form, to sway them back to a corrupted Jesus teaching that looked awfully similar to Pharisaic Judaism (Cyrus inspired). Around 51AD Claudius or Rome insisted that Paul/Sauls teachings be come written. Claudius was in on this Corruption to regain the lost Jews to Pharisaic Judaism .

As before Nero through Nerva learned about this corruption, and its this discovery that created Roman Christianity.

Anyway here's a summary if you're interested. Let me know if you find any gaps or weaknesses, only a month to publishing of the full story.

You know, I really have to challenge this. I mean, if a deity really wanted his or her message to be preserved for future generations, why put it on a scroll? Why not carve the important message in stone?

A very exciting discovery in Guatemala has offered up what I believe to be THE TRUE message about the supernatural world.

This amazing stone carving shows a divine leader, and several other deities, ornately dressed and doing something really important. They haven't finished translating it yet, but when they do, I'm pretty damn sure that it is going to hold the ANSWER TO EVERYTHING.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the Dead Sea Scrolls are damaged, with words and phrases missing. Right? Like the famous story of the three little pigs, the Dead Sea Scrolls are kind of like the house made of straw. But this Guatemalan discovery is like the house made of bricks!

I'm going to go for the deities who inspired their followers to use metaphorical bricks instead of straw. It just makes more sense.